PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF THE PETITIONER

The Petitioner, represented by the undersigned counsels as her attorneys-in-law,

respectfully submits to this Honorable Court this Pre-Trial Brief, to wit:

I.

POSSIBILITY OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OR ALTERNATIVE MODES OF DISPUTE

RESOLUTION The Petitioner is not willing to consider any amicable settlement or undergo alternativemodes of dispute resolution with respect to the primary prayer of this petition. However, thePetitioner is open to the possibility of amicable settlement in relation to the partition andaccounting of the conjugal properties and assets of her union with the Respondent. II.

PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS

The Petitioner proposes the following stipulation of facts:

1. Petitioner met Respondent sometime in May 20013 at SM City South Point, where

she worked as the Manager of Starbucks Sm City South Point Branch. Respondent

was one of the customers of said coffee shop whom she served and who took an

immediate attraction to her.

2. Respondent relentlessly wooed Petitioner for six (6) months by showering her with

flowers and gifts, visiting her frequently at the coffee shop and bringing her home.

3. During the courtship, Petitioner often asked Respondent where he worked and what

his job is,but Respondent always replied that he is still looking for work.

4. Petitioner also asked Respondent where he got his money for their dates since the

latter was unemployed while he was courting Petitioner. Respondent replied that

his parents always gave him an allowance for dates, and out-of-town trips.

5. During their dates, Petitioner observed that Respondents mother would call him

very often and ask him about his whereabouts. Petitioner also observed that every

time she went out on a date with the Respondent, he always bought his mother a

bouquet of flowers before heading home.

6. Petitioner eventually committed to a relationship with Respondent after about six

(6) months of courtship when Respondent told her that he would stop courting her

if she would not commit to a relationship with him.

7. About a month into the relationship, Petitioner attempted to break up with

Respondent. Petitioner discovered that Respondent, since graduating from college

in 2011, never sought employment.

8. Respondent later found employment in National Bookstore SM City Branch, a

company owned by his family where his mother was the Chief Executive Officer,

as a Sales Assistant.

9. Later, Respondent pleaded with the Petitioner to prove her love to him by asking

her to have pre-marital sex with him and when she refused, Respondent attempted

to commit suicide.

10. Fearing that Respondent would again attempt suicide, Petitioner engaged in pre-

marital sex with him, resulting in her feelings of guilt and remorse.

11. Soon after this, Respondent proposed marriage to Petitioner because he sensed the

feelings of constant guilt and remorse exhibited by Petitioner.

12. Petitioner and Respondent were married to each other at the Molo Cathedral on 10

January 2014 before a certain Rev. Jeremy Moreno, as evidenced by their

Certificate of Marriage dated 10 January 2014. The wedding ceremony and

reception at the Diversion 21 Hotel was attended by both parties' friends and family.

13. After the marriage ceremony, the spouses returned to their respective parents'

homes and lived separately since they had not yet established a conjugal home.

14. Respondent visited Petitioner in her house in Land Heights Phase 2 Villa, Iloilo

daily. However, Respondents mother would always call him up and ask him to go

home. Respondents mother would ask their family driver to drive her to Petitioners

residence to pick up her son in the wee hours of the morning.

15. In the later part of 2016, as a result of Respondent's request, Petitioner moved in to

the house of Respondents' parents believing it would only be temporary until the

couple has enough money of their own to rent or purchase their own residence.

16. Sometime in 2015, since the couples savings were still insufficient to purchase a

house and lot, Petitioner applied for and was employed as a Management Trainee

at Hong Kong Shanghai Bank (HSBC).

17. While working at HSBC, there were times that Petitioner would come home late

from work only to discover that Respondent was out of the house or with his

friends.

18. Also, there were a few occasions when Respondent was unable to fetch Petitioner

from HSBC as a result of the prohibition of the formers mother. In addition to this,

there were several times where Respondent would fetch Petitioner from the office

with his mother.

19. In February 2016, Petitioner and Respondent were finally able to move out of

Respondents' parents home. They moved to a house purchased by Respondents'

mother on Ledesco Village La Paz., which was a block away from Respondents'

parents home.

20. Respondents mother visited them every day, brought them food for breakfast,

lunch, and dinner. Respondents mother also volunteered to pay for the house

utilities.

21. Sometime in March 2016, Respondent was relieved of his position at Santiago

Corporation when it was dissolved. Respondent did not seek employment

elsewhere.22. Respondents mother began giving her son allowances to defray his personal and

familial expenses. Respondents mother asked Petitioner what expenses were not

being covered by her salary and even volunteered to subsidize their other household

expenses.

23. During this period of unemployment, Respondent consistently tried to convince

Petitioner to move back into the home of Respondents parents, because he stayed

there anyway almost the entire day since he had no work.

24. The couple moved back to Respondent's parents' house after Petitioner lost her

position at HSBC when the bank experienced a bank run.

25. When the couple returned to the home of Respondents parents, Respondent

constantly reminded the Petitioner that they can live off his parents who can afford

to support them anyway and that Petitioner should just abandon the idea of moving

into their own family home.

26. In a last ditch effort to save her marriage, the Petitioner convinced the Respondent

to undergo marriage counseling sometime during the month of November 2016.

27. Petitioner brought him to Dr. Barney Stinson a psychologist, who not only

counseled the couple until July of 2016 but also made a psychological evaluation

and assessment of the Respondent at the request of the Petitioner and with the

knowledge and consent of the former that his wife would receive a copy of the

doctors findings.

28. The psychological evaluation and assessment issued by Dr. Barney Stinson on 21

January 2017, revealed that the Respondent is suffering from a dependent

personality disorder which is serious, incurable and existing prior to the union between the two, rendering him incapable of performing the essential marital

obligations, the features of which are (1) difficulty making everyday decisions

without an excessive amount of advice and reassurance from others, especially

Respondents mother, (2) needs others to assume responsibility for the major areas

of his life (3) has difficulty initiating work or doing things on his or her own, (4)

feels uncomfortable or helpless when alone because of exaggerated fears of being

unable to care for himself or herself, (5) is unrealistically preoccupied with fears of

being left to take care of himself or herself, and (6) an overwhelming lack of interest

to take responsibility for his actions and his life.

29. As Petitioner could no longer bear the emotional and psychological stress brought

about by Respondents mentality and behavior, she left the home of her parents-in-

law to live on her own sometime in January 2017.

30. As found even by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic

Church in a decision they released concerning the so-called union between the

Petitioner and the Respondent on 9 March 2017 penned by a Fr. Jeremy Moreno,

S.J., the Respondent manifested a simple but deep-seated aversion to performing

his marital obligations as he failed to provide the Petitioner with the

companionship, respect, mutual help, support, and care required by law as he

decided to provide the same to his mother. The said decision goes on to state that

the inability of the Respondent to discharge the essential obligations of marriage is

grave and incurable, as the acts constituting the same are habitual, persistent,

unchanging and of enduring nature.

III.

ISSUES TO BE TRIED AND RESOLVED

The Petitioner proposes the following issues to be tried and resolved by this Honorable

Court:

Whether or not the Respondent has failed to comply with the essential marital obligations

stated in Article 68 of the Family Code;

1. If the Respondent has failed to comply with the essential marital obligations stated

in Article 68 of the Family Code, whether or not such failure was due to

psychological incapacity which is grave, serious and incurable and existing at the

time of the marriage, though only manifesting itself during the marriage.

IV.

DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED The Petitioner will present the following documents:

1. Marriage Certificate between Liza Soberano-Gil and Enrique Gil made on 10

January 2014.

2. Certificate of Employment of Enrique Gil from Santiago Corporation issued on

4 September 2016.

3. Certificate of Employment of Liza Soberano-Gil from HSBC issued in 2016.

4. Psychological Evaluation and Assessment of Enrique Gil made by Dr. Barney

Doc. No. _______;

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This CONTRACT TO SELL, made and executed this 3rd day of March, 2017 by and between:

ENRIQUE GIL, of legal age, single, Filipino, and with residence and postal address at Lot 3,Land Heights Phase 2, hereinafter referred to as the "SELLER/VENDOR";

-AND-

LIZA SOBERANO, Filipino and with residence and postal address at 21 Jalandoni St. Iloilo City,hereinafter referred to as the "BUYER/VENDEE".

WITNESSETH;

WHEREAS, the SELLER/VENDOR is the absolute and registered owner of a parcel of landconsisting of 1 Hectare (10,000) square meters, more or less, located at (Land Heights Phase 2, VillaIloilo City) and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12345 issued by the Registry of Deeds ofIloilo City.

WHEREAS, the BUYER/VENDEE has offered to buy and the SELLER /VENDOR has agreed tosell the above mentioned property under the terms and conditions herein below set forth;

NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the total sum of 1 Million Pesos P1,000,000.00Philippine Currency, and of the covenants herein after set forth the SELLER/VENDOR agrees to selland the BUYER/VENDEE agrees to buy the aforesaid property subject to the following terms andconditions:

1. The total consideration shall be One Million (Php: 1,000,000.00) PESOS, Philippine Currency,payable as follows:

a) The amount of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND (Php: 300,000.00) PESOS, representing earnestmoney shall be payable by the BUYER/VENDEE to the SELLER/VENDOR upon signing of thisContract to Sell;

b) The remaining balance in the amount of SEVEN HUNDREDTHOUSAND (Php: 700,000.00) PESOS,shall be paid in Cash on or before February 14, 2018.

c) In case the check representing the payment for the balance provided in paragraph b hereof, is dishonoredby the drawee bank, the earnest money in the amount of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND (Php:300,000.00) PESOS, shall be forfeited in favor of the SELLER/VENDOR.

2. Capital Gains Tax and Real Estate Tax, shall be for the account of the SELLER/VENDOR;3. Documentary Stamps Tax, Registration Fee, registration expenses, and all othermiscellaneous fees and expenses shall be to the account of the BUYER/VENDEE;

4. Possession to the subject property shall be delivered by the SELLER/VENDOR to

the BUYER/VENDEE upon full payment of the total consideration;

5. Upon full payment of the total price, the SELLER/VENDOR shall sign and execute a DEED OFABSOLUTE SALE in favor of the BUYER/VENDEE. The SELLER/VENDOR shall likewise executeand/or deliver any and all documents, including but not limited to the original copy of Transfer Certificateof Title, Tax Declaration and all other documents necessary for the transfer of ownershipfrom SELLER/VENDOR to the BUYER/VENDEE.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto affixed their signatures, this 3rd day of March,2017 at Iloilo City, Philippines.

ENRIQUE GIL LIZA SOBERANO

Name Name

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

Barney Stinson Theodore Mosby

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

CITY OF ILOILO ) SS.

BEFORE ME, a Notary Public, this 3rd day of March 2017, personally appeared the following:

Name CTC Number Date/Place Issued

(Enrique Gil) 10000000 March 3, 2017 Iloilo City

(Liza Soberano) 10000000 March 3, 2017 IloiloCity

This instrument, consisting of 2 page/s, including the page on which this acknowledgment is written, hasbeen signed on the left margin of each and every page thereof by the concerned parties and their witnesses,and sealed with my notarial seal.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3rd day of March , 2017 Iloilo City